Corte Madera’s 180-unit Tamal Vista Apartments: Who is Responsible For The Fiasco?

Corte Madera’s Tamal Vista Avenue 180-apartment complex now rising over the west side of US101 has become a lightning rod for high-density housing critics.

Few other communities want to see Tamal Vista Apartments replicated in their town. With a design more appropriate in urban-like suburbs such a Concord or Redwood City, the apartments are destined to serve Marinites as a daily reminder of what not to build.

The project doesn’t even satisfy the need for “affordable” subsidized apartments. Tamal Vista provides only eighteen units for low and moderate income households but 162 market-rate units for which there is scant public need.

Supposedly it’s transit-based housing yet without origin-and-destination projections no one has any idea of how many of its residents will use transit. Presumably most trips will be by auto. Why else would the development include 297 parking spaces?

According to the proverb, success has many parents, failure is an orphan.

The Town Council claims it isn’t their fault. They blame the Association of Bay Area Governments for sending them an erroneous regional housing mandate on which the town relied.

The Board of Supervisors, who have supported demand for high-density transit-oriented housing, said it wasn’t their fault. Since the monolith is in an incorporated town, how could county supervisors been involved?

ABAG’s position is that they only do what the California’s legislature demands. The state generates population projections and ABAG allocates both “affordable” and market rate housing so that every Bay Area jurisdiction builds their “fair share.”

The second mistake was that the Town inexplicitly failed to demand more than ten percent of the project be affordable. Nor did they appreciate that the stack-and-pack design would be so massive.

The supervisors’ claim of non-involvement crumbles after reviewing minutes of the Town Council’s February 7, 2012 session approving Tamal Vista Apartments’ EIR.

That’s when Supervisor Steve Kinsey involved himself.

The minutes indicate Kinsey said, “the project has unique advantages in the transit area with significant benefits for walking and bicycling in the community.” They continue reporting Kinsey’s comments saying, “he didn’t see a lot of opportunities for growth in the community; redeveloping existing sites is a key to reaching mandated housing goals, and he encouraged approval of MacFarlane’s revised design.”

ABAG did send Corte Madera the wrong housing mandate. Instead of the 244 units initially demanded, they ultimately revised it to 72 units. By then, Corte Madera had granted MacFarlane vested development rights.

Of course the developer was trying to make a profit. MacFarlane Partners had gone bust with its “higher density, urban-style” developments during the Great Recession. Tamal Vista is part of their come-back strategy.

MacFarlane had little incentive to provide more subsidized apartments or better design. A more sensitive layout for the 4.5 acre six-building project would have required more land and better architecture. Those considerations go to the bottom line and received scant consideration from either the Town or MacFarlane.

When did all the fiercely independent, anti-government hippies get replaced by central planning theorists and social engineering political control freaks?
Strange, same Birkenstocks, same pony tails, VERY different values.

So, now, the finger pointing begins? What a joke. Somebody man-up and admit they cow-towed to the terrorist organization called ABAG-Association of Bay Area Governments. Out of fear of litigation and probable threats or other intimidation, the city caved. Any lay-person can see that the project is too massive for the size of the parcel. Just drive by and take a look at the fact that you can virtually drop items from the top story window lines onto the sidewalk and the power lines are frighteningly close to the structure. If you’ve ever driven the corridor, you would know that the traffic flow cannot accommodate the projects’ increased traffic. That road is only a “back” or local road that was already very poorly designed and not equipped to handle increased traffic flow caused by the area schools and those seeking shortcuts from the Sir Francis Drake traffic.

A fiasco it is!! Shame, shame on our governing and administrative boards, for not being more vigilant with the community’s future. Now we have a momentous monstrosity for many, many years to come! Hopefully, it will act as a reminder for public officials to always do their homework completely and thoroughly!!!

This abuse of local control is what you get from central planners imposing their agendas on communities and citizens, all to achieve their utopian pipe dreams of the ordered society. It is the perfect example of a thuggish, lawless bureaucracy coercing feckless local government to incompetently implement a corrupt and unattainable objective. Remember this whenever you look at this monument to Statist ineptitude; it won’t be the last time you’re told to sublimate your rights to the power of the planners.

At our annual HOA meeting in Kentfield, Katie Rice told us that the BoS “did not see it coming,” that it was “not in [her] jurisdiction,” and that Win-Cup did not have a parking garage for the tenants.
1. Why is Kinsey intruding into her district? She did not comment so as to avoid the wrath of her constituents.
2. As if Kinsey did not inform Katie of his support for Win-Cup, both before and after 2/27.
Relative to the impending Win-Cup type development proposed at Larkspur Landing, she again knew nothing about that, but told us not to worry because nothing had been approved yet.
So when do we worry, after it is built when it is too late?
Rice is disingenuous at best, lying at worst.
She needs to go.

Ultimately – ABAG is clearly responsible for this whole mess. They effectively put a gun to a tiny town and said – “…go ahead, make my day…punk!” And frankly – ABAG should be sued into oblivion. They have clearly admitted their total miscalculation/misclassification of the matter. The lawsuit should clearly request funds for complete demolition of the project and a buyout to all the parties that financed it. We halt construction now – it’ll save a lot more money than it will cost once the ARC is complete. The architectural style reminds my of the old soviet style structures, the only thing missing is razor wire fences.

I haven’t reviewed the design for architectural appeal, however I do believe it’s a good idea to provide more rental housing in Marin. Sufficient rental housing increases vacancy rates and has the net effect of lowering rental prices. This is something Marin needs much more than mandated “affordable housing;” affordable housing schemes become social engineering at its worst.

Excellent point! Marin needs this. It’s out of the norm in terms of scale because NIMBYs have blocked so many sensible development proposals within the county. Then again, if it had a blinking Nordstrom or RAB Motors sign on its top, there would probably be far fewer complaints.

Perfect example of ABW… Authoritative But Wrong. Lots of facts, some correct and many pure fiction, muddled together with speculation and the author’s conclusions. As an aside, the boutique blogger responsible for the article seems to be making a point that the original project developer didn’t have a website. Did the author have one in 2006? Not that it has anything to do with anything other than to expose one of many not so subtle twists to what purports to be an expose – which in theory should be able to stand on its own without editorial manipulation.

Excellent point! Marin needs this. It’s out of the norm in terms of scale because NIMBYs have blocked so many sensible development proposals within the county. Then again, if it had a blinking Nordstrom or RAB Motors sign on its top, there would probably be far fewer complaints.

What everyone conveniently forgets is that the project was in the planning process for five years. It had always been proposed as 180 units and as part of the public information there were draft elevations of the project and cost projections. There were multiple opportunities for public comment at each stage. To act surprised now is disingenuous at best and certainly speaks to a gross lack of civic involvement by all of the critics, or if not that a cynical manipulation of public sentiment to further their respective agendas.

It is also amusing to see that half of the critics think this was approved as an affordable project and object for that reason, and the other half object because there are only 18 affordable units.

Another reminder is that the previous user of the site had 60,000 square feet of industrial buildings on the site, used more water than the new apartments will use (remember the white steam plume?), had large trucks coming and going as well as all of their employee traffic, and made environmentally aware Styrofoam cups.

Finally, this reminds me of the same tempest around the Millworks in Novato. Now that the project has been finished for several years it fits into its environment like it has always been there. It would be more responsible to see the final WinCup project, with all finishes and landscape in place before criticizing the appearance.

In many ways the hue and cry about this project seems like the misguided objections to the shuttle buses taking tech employees to work. Get the difference between an issue and a symbol straight before commenting. Learn the facts and history. Or maybe I’m just an old fashioned girl that expects people to be involved enough in their community to be part of the process in an intelligent, democratic and timely way rather than to jump in after it’s all over and gnash teeth and throw stones.

Sibyl– simple fact of the matter is that WinCup was single story, while the Tamal Vista apartment complex is four stories tall. It’s mass grossly outstrips the former WinCup building.

Sibyl made two gross assumptions: 1) that WinCup used more water in its manufacturing than the future 180 apartments will use (toilets, showers, dishwashers, sinks), and 2) WinCup had more traffic with its trucks and small number of employees than 180 apartments occupied by 1 or 2 driving residents (equating upwards to 360 additional cars in the same space). An already bad traffic situation will become snarled gridlock.

I agree with you that current critics should have been engaged earlier, but that’s what we elect our representatives for– to represent us by making good decisions.

Why weren’t story poles erected on this site to solicit public comment, prior to approval?!

The “single story” industrial buildings that were on the site were the equivalent of around three stories of multi-unit housing. Yes, the mass of the new buildings is much greater than the previous structures – I reiterate though that we should see the final product before criticizing appearance.

Check with MMWD… the WinCup manufacturing process was incredibly water intensive. That white plume that was visible for miles was steam/water being wasted as a by-product.

The “single story” industrial buildings were the equivalent of around three stories of multi-unit housing. The mass is greater than the previous buildings, but I suspect that once complete they will be less intrusive than they now appear.

WinCup employed 250 people who drove to work every day. Plus there were large trucks that came and went. And one of the buildings next to the factory was an office building with at least 25 occupants. Will the new project have more trips? Probably. Will they have the same impact at the same times of day? Probably not. I notice that the biggest issue now is that everyone that backs up wants to make the left turn onto Wornum… take the extra two minutes and go down to Tamalpais Drive and save some stress

Story poles were in place for weeks if not months…

Our elected representatives believed they were making good decisions. They had input from the public, Town staff, outside consultants, the State, etc. However, it is also true that as Thomas Jefferson said, “Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.”

It is time to abolish ABAG which is an outdated, irrelevant agency. Originally formed to oversee redevelopment (which no longer exists), it has become a monster agency whose appointed members are fighting to retain their positions and to appear relevant. Plan Bay Area, which strives to homogenize the 9 bay area counties so that Walnut Creek, Palo Alto, and Corte Madera all look the same is a perfect example of the backward thinking of this group. Listening to no one, ABAG voted to approve this plan which has caused citizens in every bay area county to rise up in fury. Ultimately, I believe their loyalty is to politicians who are supported by developers which is a sad commentary on the political situation in California today. Now is clearly the time begin the process to get rid of this den of miscreants. Join the organization in your community which is working on this goal.

“Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.” ABAG was not formed to oversee redevelopment. It was put together because the Bay Area is a number of independent fiefs that act like their planning decisions don’t affect other parts of the region. At the time Marin County had a net-out commute of workers to San Francisco as well as Sonoma County commuters that would travel through Marin. Just one of the issues that led to the formation of a regional planning agency was that Sonoma was unhappy that it’s housing policies allowed for development while Marin did not – forcing the “burden” of growth into Sonoma.

Have the base issues changed? Marin now has more people commute to work here than out of the County… traffic probably not too different. Is the Bay Area still a hodgepodge of interdependent jurisdictions? Yes. Would they play nicely without a regional board of some sort? No. Do we still need ABAG or something like it? Yes.

Why? Because each geographic or socially based entity in the area believes it is exceptional, unique and needs its own jurisdictional control. As proof, in Marin alone, count the number of school districts, community service districts, fire departments, water and sewer districts, planning and building departments, etc. We even have our own retirement system! Because we are special…

According to the Corte Madera town council zoning documents, the original plan for the development was changed in seven areas, one of them being that its height restrictions were eliminated so as to provide “less restrictive building height limits.” I would like to know who requested those changes and why. Many documents relating to the project are on the Town of Corte Madera website.

So hard to believe something of this large scale would be approved. The traffic is already horrid in the afternoon with people trying to get onto 101 North……what will it be like when this complex opens ? Has anyone addressed the traffic patterns ?

I think Harold has the right idea – follow the money! Who works for McFarlane? Did McFarlane make campaign donations?

Sibyl grossly overstates the impact of traffic from the WinCup plant. There were never 250 employees at the plant. There were hardly any cars in the parking lot. The work schedule did not conflict with rush hour. The truck traffic was minimally invasive.

I agree that story poles were erected. However, they gave no indication of the mass and ‘closeness’ of the buildings. If the project has 297 parking spaces, it gives one pause as to the transit focus of the project.

I am writing as a tenant of one of the buildings across the street. Traffic has been a mess for years. Once this project is finished, I am of the opinion that traffic will be completely gridlocked at least four times every weekday – early morning commute including Redwood, lunch time, Redwood end of school day and the evening commute. Try getting off at Lucky Drive at any of those times now. It is only going to get worse! And there is no practical way to alleviate the current traffic mess, let alone what this project will create.

At the end there were 105 employees working down to none as WinCup moved the business to Arizona – thus the empty parking lot. Five years before the closure there were 250 employees. How did the workforce not impact peak traffic in both morning and evening slots? And by minimally invasive truck traffic do you mean that it doesn’t fit your argument so you minimize it?

My point about story poles was in response to a previous poster asking why story poles weren’t installed… not addressing mass and proximity of buildings. So… instead of hanging out there with the comment about the transit focus, please tell us what you mean.

You last comment about traffic – does that mean that the current and any future traffic problem is due to the tenants across the street (ahem… you?) and high school kids driving to school, to lunch and home, as well as commuters going to or coming home from work?

I live in the adjacent town of Larkspur and I’m concerned this may be happening here soon. I’m a stay-at-home father of 3 preschoolers. A neighbor introduced me to Nextdoor, a ‘neighborhood-based’ social-media site. I wondered if this upstart local collaboration tool could help unravel the mystery. Using only my iPhone, countless google searches, and the cooperation of my neighbors (within a 1-mile radius), I decided to begin documenting the still unfolding story.

Yes David and most of your neighbours dispise the fact that you incessantly spam the Nextdoor web-site to the point that many won’t even use it anymore. Only the same ole handful of people ever even resond to your obessive posting and it’s obvious that it’s some kind of colusion between all of you to pound your agenda into peoples heads through your right wing rhetoric, tea party buzz phrases, conspiracy theories etc. The compulsive posts are just creating an aversion in people to the whole subject and not helping the anti-everything crowd look like anymore than it is really is. A bunch of extremests. I would dare say that staying at home isn’t serving you well. It’s definitely driving everyone else in Larkspur crazy.

There’s more dots to connect in this story, Dick, like who Supervisor Kinsey is speaking for and why. A story in the May 28, 2013 IJ headlined
“Supervisor Kinsey draws big re-election campaign donations” by Nels Johnson: The big money is betting on Supervisor Steve Kinsey to win re-election June 5. Kinsey has mounted a $142,000 campaign war chest in his bid to win another term on the county Board of Supervisors, Kinsey, who posted hefty donations from real estate, business, legal and labor union interests, reported collecting $142,023, including a $10,250 personal loan, and spending $95,765 through May 24. Surging contributions to the Kinsey campaign included $8,000 that came in after a May 19 contribution period deadline, requiring an additional report as part of documents filed last week.
Kinsey donors included developer Joe Shekou of Tiburon, $5,000; Susan Pritzker of Nicasio, director, PTF Foundation of Chicago, $5,000; and Dennis Gilardi of Larkspur, owner of Gilardi & Co., $5,000; California Real Estate Political Action Committee, $3,000; Marin Builders Association PAC, and Daniel Weissman, Mill Valley realty investor…